Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Selection of the Lowest Level for Fusion in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • Systematic Reviews
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Study design

A systematic review of studies reporting pain as a long-term outcome after spinal fusion surgery for treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Objective

To identify studies that report pain after spinal fusion surgery for scoliosis based on the distal extent of fusion and to combine results to determine if there is an increased incidence of back pain in patients treated with fusion to the lower lumbar spine.

Summary of Background Data

The methods and results of existing studies are inconsistent and only occasionally reach statistical significance. No thorough review of the available information has been published.

Methods

An electronic literature search was performed to identify studies that met predetermined eligibility criteria. Data extracted included number of cases fused to L3 or above, to L4 or L5, and the number of those cases experiencing pain. Further, when possible, the pain variable was stratified into severe or mild categories to allow a more specific subanalysis.

Results

Eight studies met inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis for occurrence of pain, the primary outcome, resulted in a final odds ratio of 1.29 (95% CI 0.91-1.82, n = 1,155). When pain was stratified according to severity and only those cases in the severe category considered for meta-analysis, the resulting odds ratio was 1.43 (95% CI 0.72-2.82, n = 900). Neither analysis reached statistical significance.

Conclusions

Although there was a trend toward increased pain in patients whose fusion extended to L4 or L5, there was no statistically significant association between the distal level of fusion and incidence of subsequent back pain, both with and without stratification according to severity of back pain. Because of the limitations of published research, the effect of fusion into the lower lumbar spine on back pain is unknown. Higher quality studies with long-term follow-up and consistent reporting of outcomes are needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bartie BJ, Lonstein JE, Winter RB. Long-term follow-up of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients who had Harrington instrumentation and fusion to the lower lumbar vertebrae: is low back pain a problem? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:E873e8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sanders JO, Haynes R, Lighter D, et al. Variation in care among spinal deformity surgeons: Results of a survey of the Shriners Hospitals for Children. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:1444e9.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Weinstein SL. Bristol-Myers Squibb/Zimmer award for distinguished achievement in orthopaedic research. Long-term follow-up of pediatric orthopaedic conditions. Natural history and outcomes of treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2000;82-A:980–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee MC, Ounpuu S, Solomito M, et al. Loss in spinal motion from inclusion of a single midlumbar level in posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38:E1405–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Marks M, Newton PO, Petcharaporn M, et al. Postoperative segmental motion of the unfused spine distal to the fusion in 100 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012;37:826–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sanchez-Raya J, Bago J, Pellise F, et al. Does the lower instrumented vertebra have an effect on lumbar mobility, subjective perception of trunk flexibility, and quality of life in patients with idiopathic scoliosis treated by spinal fusion? J Spinal Disord Tech 2012;25:437–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cochran T, Irstam L, Nachemson A. Long-term anatomic and functional changes in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated by Harrington rod fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1983;8:576–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Luk KD, Lee FB, Leong JC, Hsu LC. The effect on the lumbosacral spine of long spinal fusion for idiopathic scoliosis. A minimum 10-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1987;12:996–1000.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Moskowitz A, Moe JH, Winter RB, Binner H. Long-term follow-up of scoliosis fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1980;62:364–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ding R, Liang J, Qiu G, et al. Evaluation of quality of life in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with different distal fusion level: a comparison of L3 versus L4. J Spinal Disord Tech 2014;27:E155–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ginsburg HH, Goldstein L, Robinson SC, et al. Back pain in postoperative idiopathic scoliosis: long-term follow-up study. Spine 1979;4:518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hayes MA, Tompkins SF, Herndon WA, et al. Clinical and radiological evaluation of lumbosacral motion below fusion levels in idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1988;13:1161–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Andersen MO, Christensen SB, Thomsen K. Outcome at 10 years after treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31:350–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bjerkreim I, Steen H, Brox JI. Idiopathic scoliosis treated with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation: Evaluation 10 years after surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:2103–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Connolly PJ, Von Schroeder HP, Johnson GE, Kostuik JP Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Long-term effect of instrumentation extending to the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995;77:1210–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Danielsson AJ, Romberg K, Nachemson AL. Spinal range of motion, muscle endurance, and back pain and function at least 20 years after fusion or brace treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a case-control study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31:275–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dickson JH, Erwin WD, Rossi D. Harrington instrumentation and arthrodesis for idiopathic scoliosis. A twenty-one-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990;72:678–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Edgar MA, Mehta MH. Long-term follow-up of fused and unfused idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1988;70:712–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Grouw AV, Nadel CI, Weierman RJ, Lowell HA. Long term follow-up of patients with idiopathic scoliosis treated surgically: a preliminary subjective study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976;117:197–201.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Helenius I, Remes V, Yrjonen T, et al. Comparison of long-term functional and radiologic outcomes after Harrington instrumentation and spondylodesis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a review of 78 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002;27:176–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Helenius I, Remes V, Yrjonen T, et al. Harrington and Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Long-term functional and radiographic outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003;85-A:2303–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Helenius I, Remes V, Lamberg T, et al. Long-term health-related quality of life after surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008;90:1231–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hill D, Raso VJ, Moreau K, et al. Long-term follow-up of surgically treated AIS patients. Stud Health Technol Inform 2002;91:477–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Humke T, Grob D, Scheier H, Siegrist H. Cotrel-Dubousset and Harrington instrumentation in idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison of long-term results. Eur Spine J 1995;4:280–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Large DF, Doig WG, Dickens DR, et al. Surgical treatment of double major scoliosis. Improvement of the lumbar curve after fusion of the thoracic curve. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1991;73:121–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Blanke K, et al. Radiographic results of arthrodesis with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A five to ten-year follow-up study J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998;80:807–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mariconda M, Galasso O, Barca P, Milano C. Minimum 20-year follow-up results of Harrington rod fusion for idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 2005;14:854–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mayo NE, Goldberg MS, Poitras B, et al. The Ste-Justine Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Cohort Study. Part III: Back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1994;19:1573–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Michel CR, Lalain JJ. Late results of Harrington’s operation. Long-term evolution of the lumbar spine below the fused segments. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1985;10:414–20.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Niemeyer T, Bovingloh AS, Grieb S, et al. Low back pain after spinal fusion and Harrington instrumentation for idiopathic scoliosis. Int Orthop 2005;29:47–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Padua R, Padua S, Aulisa L, et al. Patient outcomes after Harrington instrumentation for idiopathic scoliosis: a 15- to 28-year evaluation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001;26:1268–73.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Perez-Grueso FS, Fernandez-Baillo N, Arauz de Robles S, Garcia Fernandez A. The low lumbar spine below Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation: long-term findings. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:2333–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Remes V, Helenius I, Schlenzka D, et al. Cotrel-Dubousset (CD) or universal spine system (USS) instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS):comparison of midterm clinical, functional, and radiologic outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004;29:2024–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Takayama K, Nakamura H, Matsuda H. Low back pain in patients treated surgically for scoliosis: longer than sixteen-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:2198–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. White SF, Asher MA, Lai SM, Burton DC. Patients’ perceptions of overall function, pain, and appearance after primary posterior instrumentation and fusion for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999;24:1693–9; discussion 1699–700.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Danielsson AJ, Nachemson AL. Back pain and function 23 years after fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a case-control study-part II. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003;28:E373–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Fabry G, Van Melkebeek J, Bockx E. Back pain after Harrington rod instrumentation for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1989;14:620–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Gotze C, Liljenqvist UR, Slomka A, et al. Quality of life and back pain: outcome 16.7 years after Harrington instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002;27:1456–63; discussion 1463–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Krismer M, Wimmer C, Bauer R, et al. Long-term results after Harrington instrumentation: increased translation and pain. Eur Spine J 1993;2:153–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Paonessa KJ, Engler GL. Back pain and disability after Harrington rod fusion to the lumbar spine for scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1992;17:S249–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Poitras B, Mayo NE, Goldberg MS, et al. The Ste-Justine Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Cohort Study. Part IV: surgical correction and back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1994;19:1582–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Takahashi S, Delecrin J, Passuti N. Changes in the unfused lumbar spine in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. A 5- to 9-year assessment after Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1997;22:517–23; discussion 524.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Egger M, Schneider M, Davey Smith G. Spurious precision? Metaanalysis of observational studies. BMJ 1998;316:140–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Bhandari M, Morrow F, Kulkarni AV, Tornetta 3rd P. Meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery. A systematic review of their methodologies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001;83-A:15–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Metaanalysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000;283:2008–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Akazawa T, Minami S, Kotani T, et al. Health-related quality of life and low back pain of patients surgically treated for scoliosis after 21 years or more of follow-up: comparison among nonidiopathic scoliosis, idiopathic scoliosis, and healthy subjects. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012;37:1899–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ginsburg HH, Goldstein L, Haake PW, et al. Longitudinal study of back pain in postoperative idiopathic scoliosis: long-term follow-up, phase IV. Ashville, NC: 30th Annual Meeting of the Scoliosis Research Society; September 1995. p. 13–6.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Sanders JO, Carreon LY, Sucato DJ, et al. Spinal Deformity Study Group. Preoperative and perioperative factors effect on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgical outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:1867–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Aaro S, Ohlen G The effect of Harrington instrumentation on the sagittal configuration and mobility of the spine in scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1983;8:570–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 252, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA

    Matthew Merriman MD

  2. Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA

    Calvin Hu MD & James Sanders MD

  3. Division of Health Policy and Outcomes Research, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA

    Katia Noyes PhD, MPH

  4. Golisano Children’s Hospital, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA

    James Sanders MD

Authors
  1. Matthew Merriman MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Calvin Hu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katia Noyes PhD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. James Sanders MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew Merriman MD.

Additional information

Author disclosures: MM (funding from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry); CH (none); KN (none); JS (none).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Merriman, M., Hu, C., Noyes, K. et al. Selection of the Lowest Level for Fusion in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Spine Deform 3, 128–135 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2014.06.010

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2014.06.010

Keywords

Search

Navigation